Case Law
Subject : Education Law - University Regulations
Bengaluru:
The Karnataka High Court, in a significant ruling, has quashed a notification by the Karnataka State Law University (
The petitioners, students of
The core grievance of the students was that they had received instruction and studied the IPC curriculum. However, they were unsuccessful in their previous attempts. With the introduction of BNS replacing IPC, the university's decision meant they would be tested on a subject for which they had received no classes or instruction.
Petitioners' Stance: The students argued that it was unjust and impractical to expect them to write an examination for BNS, a subject they were never taught. They contended that their academic preparation was entirely based on the IPC syllabus.
University's Defense:
Sri.
Justice Suraj Govindaraj , presiding over the bench, found merit in the petitioners' arguments, drawing upon previous similar matters dealt with by the Court.
The Court decisively stated, "The submission of Sri.
Emphasizing the practical difficulty and unfairness, the judgment noted:
"Insofar as students who have already attended classes for IPC and have failed in the examination conducted for IPC, it cannot be expected that those students take up the examination for BNS which has never been taught to them in the course structure."
The Court highlighted that this was not an isolated issue, urging
"This is not the first petition that is coming before this Court. It is therefore required for the
KSLU to look into this aspect and not insist on the students who have failed in IPC to take up the examination in BNS since they have never been provided with instructions in relation to that subject."
The Court clarified that these observations would not apply to new students who would prospectively be studying BNS.
The Karnataka High Court passed the following order:
1. Writ Petition Allowed: The students' petition was successful.
2.
Notification Quashed for IPC Students:
The impugned
3.
Direction for IPC Examination:
The respondent-University (
The Court also directed the university to publish all notifications, circulars, or any other decisions affecting students on its official website and ordered the university to pay the costs of the litigation to the petitioners. This ruling provides significant relief to law students caught in the transition between the old and new penal codes, underscoring the principle that examinations must be based on the curriculum taught to the students.
#KSLU #IPCvsBNS #LegalEducation #KarnatakaHighCourt
No Absolute Bar on Simultaneous Parole/Furlough for Co-Accused Under Delhi Prisons Rules: Delhi High Court
30 Apr 2026
Rejection of Jurisdiction Plea under Section 16 Arbitration Act Not Challengeable under Section 34 Till Final Award: Supreme Court
30 Apr 2026
'Living Separately' Under Section 13B HMA Means Cessation Of Marital Obligations, Regardless Of Residence: Patna High Court
30 Apr 2026
Consolidated SCNs under Sections 73/74 CGST Act Permissible Across Multiple FYs: Karnataka HC
01 May 2026
Allahabad HC Stays NCLT Principal Bench Order Mandating Joint Scrutiny of Allahabad Bench Filings
01 May 2026
Bombay HC Grants Interim Protection from Arrest Despite Pending Anticipatory Bail in Lower Court Due to Accused's Marriage: Sections 351(2), 64(2)(m), 74 IPC
01 May 2026
Heavy Machinery Barred in Mining Leases Except Dredging: Uttarakhand HC Directs DM to Enforce Rule 29(17) of Minor Mineral Rules
01 May 2026
No Deemed Confirmation After Probation Without Written Order Under Model Standing Orders Clause 4A: Bombay High Court
01 May 2026
CJI Declares Sikkim India's First Paperless Judiciary
01 May 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.